Development: Refactor RepositoryAccessService and plagiarism access check

[mateusmm01]

Checklist

General

• I tested all changes and their related features with all corresponding user types on a test server.
• Language: I followed the guidelines for inclusive, diversity-sensitive, and appreciative language.
• I chose a title conforming to the naming conventions for pull requests.

Server

• Important: I implemented the changes with a very good performance and prevented too many (unnecessary) database calls.
• I strictly followed the server coding and design guidelines.
• I added pre-authorization annotations according to the guidelines and checked the course groups for all new REST Calls (security).
• I documented the Java code using JavaDoc style.

Client

• Important: I implemented the changes with a very good performance, prevented too many (unnecessary) REST calls and made sure the UI is responsive, even with large data.
• I strictly followed the client coding and design guidelines.
• Following the theming guidelines, I specified colors only in the theming variable files and checked that the changes look consistent in both the light and the dark theme.
• I documented the TypeScript code using JSDoc style.
• I translated all newly inserted strings into English and German.

Changes affecting Programming Exercises

• High priority: I tested all changes and their related features with all corresponding user types on a test server configured with the integrated lifecycle setup (LocalVC and LocalCI).
• I tested all changes and their related features with all corresponding user types on a test server configured with Gitlab and Jenkins.
• I tested all changes and their related features with all corresponding user types on a test server configured with Bitbucket and Bamboo.

Motivation and Context

Currently, the RepositoryAccessService isn't very well written or easily readable. It plays a vital role in the security of Artemis programming exercises. Therefore, it should be refactored following these rules:
https://docs.artemis.cit.tum.de/admin/accessRights.html#programming-exercises-repository-access

Description

RepositoryAccessService was refactored. We also fetch the files for the plagiarism check separately with their own endpoints. These check the plagiarism access instead of the general repository access.

Steps for Testing

Prerequisites:

• 1 Admin

• 1 Instructor

• 1 Tutor

• 1 Student

• 1 Programming Exercises

Create different Programming Exercises with different rules and check that you can only access the repositories in the expected way (https://docs.artemis.cit.tum.de/admin/accessRights.html#programming-exercises-repository-access)

Also check that instructors and students can still view the plagiarism views as expected

Exam Mode Testing

Prerequisites:

• 1 Admin

• 1 Instructor

• 1 Tutor

• 1 Student

• 1 Exam with Programming Exercises

Create an Exam with different Programming Exercises with different rules and check that you can only access the repositories in the expected way (https://docs.artemis.cit.tum.de/admin/accessRights.html#programming-exercises-repository-access)

Testserver States

Note

These badges show the state of the test servers.
Green = Currently available, Red = Currently locked

Review Progress

Performance Review

• I (as a reviewer) confirm that the client changes (in particular related to REST calls and UI responsiveness) are implemented with a very good performance
• I (as a reviewer) confirm that the server changes (in particular related to database calls) are implemented with a very good performance

Code Review

• Code Review 1
• Code Review 2

Manual Tests

• Test 1
• Test 2

Exam Mode Test

• Test 1
• Test 2

Test Coverage

Screenshots

Summary by CodeRabbit

• New Features
  • Introduced a method to verify access to plagiarism submissions.
  • New endpoints to retrieve files for plagiarism view in programming exercises.
• Refactor
  • Simplified the constructor in RepositoryAccessService.
  • Enhanced access control logic in RepositoryAccessService to handle user roles and actions more effectively.
  • Improved file retrieval process in RepositoryService and RepositoryResource for better readability and maintainability.

[coderabbitai]

Walkthrough

This update introduces significant improvements to repository access control, file retrieval, and plagiarism functionality within the system. It simplifies the constructor of the RepositoryAccessService, enhances access control logic, adds methods for plagiarism submission access and file retrieval, and establishes a new service for managing programming exercise repositories. Additionally, it refactors existing methods for better maintainability and readability, ensuring a more robust handling of repositories and their associated files.

Changes

File Path	Change Summary
src/main/java/de/tum/in/www1/artemis/service/RepositoryAccessService.java src/main/java/de/tum/in/www1/artemis/web/rest/repository/RepositoryResource.java	Simplified constructor, refactored access control, added plagiarism submission access verification. Refactored file retrieval logic for improved maintainability.
src/main/java/de/tum/in/www1/artemis/service/RepositoryParticipationService.java	Introduced to manage programming exercise repositories and participations.
src/main/java/de/tum/in/www1/artemis/service/RepositoryService.java	Added method to retrieve file content from a repository.
src/main/java/de/tum/in/www1/artemis/web/rest/repository/RepositoryProgrammingExerciseParticipationResource.java	Added method for plagiarism view, refactored repository retrieval, added new endpoints for file access.

Related issues

• Plagiarism, Programming Exercises: Side-by-side view incorrectly handles HTTP 409 responses from /api/repository/*/files #7026: The improvements in handling repository access and file retrieval, especially for plagiarism checks, could potentially address issues with incorrect rendering and error handling during plagiarism checks. This PR's enhancements in access control and file management might be relevant for ensuring accurate display and functionality in plagiarism views.
• Exam: Divide the Testing Process into Steps #6621: Although this PR does not directly address the specifics of handling dummy tests in exam programming exercises, the underlying improvements in repository and file management could indirectly support more robust configurations and operations related to exams and testing processes. However, the direct connection is tenuous, and this linkage is more speculative without specific changes targeting exam processes.

Thank you for using CodeRabbit. We offer it for free to the OSS community and would appreciate your support in helping us grow. If you find it useful, would you consider giving us a shout-out on your favorite social media?

Share

• X
• Mastodon
• Reddit
• LinkedIn

---

Tips

Chat

There are 3 ways to chat with CodeRabbit:

• Review comments: Directly reply to a review comment made by CodeRabbit. Example:
  • I pushed a fix in commit <commit_id>.
  • Generate unit-tests for this file.
  • Open a follow-up GitHub issue for this discussion.
• Files and specific lines of code (under the "Files changed" tab): Tag @coderabbitai in a new review comment at the desired location with your query. Examples:
  • @coderabbitai generate unit tests for this file.
  • @coderabbitai modularize this function.
• PR comments: Tag @coderabbitai in a new PR comment to ask questions about the PR branch. For the best results, please provide a very specific query, as very limited context is provided in this mode. Examples:
  • @coderabbitai generate interesting stats about this repository and render them as a table.
  • @coderabbitai show all the console.log statements in this repository.
  • @coderabbitai read src/utils.ts and generate unit tests.
  • @coderabbitai read the files in the src/scheduler package and generate a class diagram using mermaid and a README in the markdown format.

Note: Be mindful of the bot's finite context window. It's strongly recommended to break down tasks such as reading entire modules into smaller chunks. For a focused discussion, use review comments to chat about specific files and their changes, instead of using the PR comments.

CodeRabbit Commands (invoked as PR comments)

• @coderabbitai pause to pause the reviews on a PR.
• @coderabbitai resume to resume the paused reviews.
• @coderabbitai review to trigger a review. This is useful when automatic reviews are disabled for the repository.
• @coderabbitai resolve resolve all the CodeRabbit review comments.
• @coderabbitai help to get help.

Additionally, you can add @coderabbitai ignore anywhere in the PR description to prevent this PR from being reviewed.

CodeRabbit Configration File (.coderabbit.yaml)

• You can programmatically configure CodeRabbit by adding a .coderabbit.yaml file to the root of your repository.
• The JSON schema for the configuration file is available here.
• If your editor has YAML language server enabled, you can add the path at the top of this file to enable auto-completion and validation: # yaml-language-server: $schema=https://coderabbit.ai/integrations/coderabbit-overrides.v2.json

CodeRabbit Discord Community

Join our Discord Community to get help, request features, and share feedback.

[julian-christl]

Good job in general, I have a few remarks

[julian-christl]

That's also a nice way of doing it. Good job with the changes! Code looks good now!

[Strohgelaender]

code looks good to me.

Tested locally, students are able to see the other student's code (in case of a plagriarism accousation) only after the deadline.

[milljoniaer]

Code LGTM

[laurenzfb]

demonstrated in testing session. lgtm

resolved

[julian-christl]

Reapprove code, changes look good

[krusche]

10 e2e tests consistently fail. Please double check what is happening there